You will hear my impressions, but it is not likely to be too soon, I think 100 assembled units are tested and shipped, then the kits will start to be distributed and installed, and I'm #41.

Interestingly, I thought it would be hard to figure out which PWD Mk II to send in to be "transformed" into a DirectStream DAC. I thought probably the oldest one right, several years older than the second, new one, why not keep the newest one as a PWD Mk II. Well. . . I put that new one in place in my main system and it really does NOT sound like the old one. Clearly the older one is far more seasoned and "mellow" and far more to my taste.* The other sounded fine in my second system which is a bit less resolving than the main one. So I'll be sending the newer one back for conversion to the DirectStream and keeping the original one (which started out as a PWD (Mk I)) for my second system.

Awesome Lon! I feel like the DirectStream is made for you and all your Redbook CDs. Hopefully it lives up to the hype and you have the same Holy _ _ _ _ reaction that everyone who has heard it so far has had. We both know that PSA tend to live up to their claims (after you cut through all the hyperbole).

I plan to wait for more reactions to roll in, but I have a feeling it's inevitable. Can't wait to hear your reaction.

Are you running the same firmware on both of your older PW DACs? That could explain the differences in sound you are hearing.

Doh. Yeah, that's probably a contributing factor, and hadn't thought of it. To be honest, I have not updated the firmware on the first nor the second, it's possible they are running the same firmware, also possible they are not.

I checked. Both the same firmware. Only thing I haven't checked is to see if they both/either have the fuses that were supposed to be part of the upgrade to MK II. I know it was part of the kit, not sure that it was part of the production model. And I had them upgrade the board because one of my inputs (coaxial) had shorted out on the Mk I board, and didn't open the unit to see if they changed fuses, didn't sound as if they did.

Also got to thinking: one has a few years plus more screen time use than the other. I'll be sending the new one back for conversion. Looks as if it will be sometime in June.

Paul's latest musings are on building a simple music server using a Mac mini. I use a mini as a server with Audirvana. I started with Audirvana because it was free, but liked the sound and upgraded to the plus version.

Yesterday he mentioned his choice for software is BitPerfect. At $9.95 I decided to give it a go. I found the sound to be significantly different than Audirvana. Less aggressive, more smooth.

Better? I don't know which one I like better yet. But I am now rolling Mac software which is kinda weird. Audirvana for rock, Bitperfect for jazz/anything softer.

I have seen those tests before and think they are fascinating but I don't think they register how the sound is received by a human, in a room, for a specific recording, on a specific system. They typically measure the properties of the electrical signal.

You don't hear an electrical signal, you hear a sound, which is produced by a chain of interacting components (room included).

The only way that I have been able to *prove* that there are differences is to record the same song playing through my system using the same recording device and then line them up in a computer editor so that they are exactly sync'd, then randomly remove a portion of the A or B track for the entire length of the song. Then I output the entire hybrid song and then listen to it and see if I can determine when the recording goes from the A track to the B track. In most instances I can.

I don't think you can measure soundstage or imaging with this technique, but you can definitely hear differences in things like bass response, treble, definition and decay.

Maybe I am just being fooled again by the recording in the same way that I am being fooled when I listen to a track, make a change and then listen to it again. But I can't always remember where in the hybrid recording I switched tracks, yet I know when the switch occurs - just by listening.

I agree that there is something going on, even with the power cords we listened to (though I still don't believe it was a big improvement) - so I keep my hopes up that it's just something that we haven't figure out how to measure yet.

But the fact is, all things being equal, if the software outputs the exact same data, with the same hardware, with the same jitter, with the same everything...then it *should* sound the same. So why are we hearing something? That guys measurements are very compelling.

I changed BitPerfect to the settings Paul recommended in his lastest blog posting and the sound came much closer to what I get with Audirvana+. Now, I'm not sure that I could always pick out which program is playing. I still think I give Audirvana the edge but I need some more time with it.

Interestingly enough, iTunes by itself, BitPerfect and Audirvana+ all seem to output at different levels. Audirvana definitely has the highest output so matching volume levels for comparing the programs is difficult.

I don't know anything about high end transports, but I would believe Paul's comments about the Mini rivaling his transports. To me, it sounds pretty good. Especially once I plugged it into the PPP and added a better power cord.

Glad I have two PS Audio PerfectWave transports, and don't have to do computer audio. It's all more than I want to figure out or spend time I don't have downloading or ripping, and on top of that there's then all kinds of firmware rolling in the picture!